I am interested in the subject of these lines from the Aeneid - I give the Latin with an English translation / suggestion as to what the subject-object relationship is.... My translation conflicts with that in the Loeb edition (Fairclough). 1. is my translation and 2. is Fairclough's

I am interested in the role of fortuna which Fairclough has as an object and I have as a subject.

A similar fortune has finally wanted [in other words, allowed] me to settle in this land, [after] having also been tossed through many difficulties.

Gramatically, similis could modify either fortuna or labores, but the juxtaposition of two adjectives and two nouns like this, with similis fortuna enclosed by multos labores, is extremely characteristic of Latin verse, even if the hyperbaton seems violent at first glance.

iactatam agrees with me (accusative), and fortuna (nominative) is not necessarily the grammatical agent of iactatam (but the sense would seem to make it so).

Quare is 'therefore' (qua re) here, not 'why'--it's a relative that serves as a connective from the preceding sentence, not an interrogative word.